Where Islam spreads, freedom dies

This is from earlier in the year. It seems that a hitherto unacknowledged protest movement has been underway for some time, consisting of European women outraged at what is being done to their countries and not afraid to say so.

I can't make out everything she says but it includes:

"Spain for the Spanish... the blacks to Africa, the Chinese to China."

Towards the end of the film, a negro goes over and assaults the woman physically.

We need a cool acronym to give a name to this resistance movement. Some suggestions below.

WRATH - Women Raging At The HajjisWRATHFUL - Women Raging At Their Horribly Fucked Up Lands

The hacker claims to have access to all the website's data, including email and IP addresses of everyone who has ever posted a comment there. He laughs that people are stupid enough to post with their real email addresses, including work email addresses, some he claims come from government websites.

On the 1389 blog not long ago, in relation to Wordpress taking action against BareNakedIslam in response to a complaint from CAIR, the point was made that users of Wordpress and Blogger were much more vulnerable to legal manoeuvres designed to suppress free speech. Even if that's true, they are much less vulnerable to website hacking. Because then it's not just some Mickey Mouse hosting company the hacker has to go up against, but big companies like Google with elaborate security systems.

Can't resist some more Enoch Powell quotes. The prescience almost makes you weep.

Indians and others protested last night that a speech by Mr Enoch Powell yesterday to Southall Chamber of Commerce was dangerously inflammatory and damaging to race relations in an area that contains one of the highest concentrations of Indians in the country. Mr Powell said that Asians posed more of a threat to Britain than Black Power. "Our towns and Cities are being taken over and transformed not by the Caribbean but by Asia," he said. "It is by Black Power that the headlines are caught, and under the shape of the Negro that the consequences for Britain of immigration and what is miscalled 'race' are popularly depicted. "Yet it is more truly when he looks into the eyes of Asia that the Englishman comes face to face with those who will dispute with him the possession of his native land."

...Referring to the example of Detroit, Mr Powell quoted a British planner's writing in a professional journal, who found in particular "the polarization of attitudes and locations, fear, lack of contact between various income groups, diminishing contact between black and white populations, go hand in hand with changing locations". Mr Powell prophesied: "The name of that city a generation ahead could be Bradford or Birmingham or London. Yet it need not be. The power of decision is still in our hands, and that power is a power over numbers; but it is a power which grows weaker as each year goes by and which once lost is never to be had again."

Wouldn't it be great if this was the start of a resistance movement? It could go down in history like the Suffragettes. We need a cool, catchy name for it. I wonder if the Guardian will get "on board" with it as a vibrant example of real-world feminism. Probably not.

Reading through old newspaper archives, it becomes obvious that it was in the 70s that the sky fell in: that it became virtually impossible to talk about the unfolding genocide as the mechanisms of dissent suppression gradually became institutionalised. The Age of Unreason began.

There was, of course, one exception, one far-sighted man amongst the many:

A public policy of repatriating immigrants from Britain Would cost £200m a year over five years, Mr Enoch Powell, United Ulster Unionist Coalition MP for Down, South, said last night.

He told Surrey Branch of the Conservative Monday Club at Croydon any imaginable expenditure would be a cheap option to the gravity of the alternative. He said: The magnitudes involved are far from astronomic: one million at £1,000 per head, I have scaled up my 1969 hypothesis of £2,000 per family, represents over five years no more than £200m a year; and you could double that figure without producing more than a ripple on the surface of recent budgets.

Not only in financial terms but in the much more significant terms of human skills, experience and qualifications, the outlay would represent "development aid" of a size and effectiveness which current expenditures on aid could not match; and in both human and material terms the future savings would be incalculable.

They take upon themselves a fearful responsibility who scoff at policies of repatriation and insist that the people of this country, all of them, must accept the inevitability of the prospect which the inadvertence or timidity of a few years have created. All round, people are calling for "a stop to immigration"; and parties and politicians are pledging themselves' to formulae which they hope will be mistaken for the equivalent of that.

Whether they all fully realize it or not, the whole thing is an irrelevance and a deception. Twenty years ago, when the Government shelved for the second time a measure to distinguish between British subjects belonging and not belonging to the United Kingdom," stopping immigration "still had a practical meaning, and would in fact have averted all that has followed and is to come. But as long as 10 years ago, "stopping immigration" has already become largely meaningless as a policy prescription.

With each year that has passed, the foreseeable future of our urban areas has depended less and less upon the net annual addition from outside and more and more upon the consequences of the size, distribution and age-structure of the already resident coloured population. Those who, like Lord Brooke of Hampstead, were talking in the middle 1960s about cities one-third coloured were not dolng so because they assumed or even dreamt that in the early 70s the net annual intake would be nearer 100,000 a year than 50,000. The prospect rested already upon what existed then.

Yet even this is not the principal reason for what I have called the irrelevance of "stopping immigration". The principal reason is that, once given, a massive alien population accepted as permanently resident, especially if that population is predominantly Asian, immigration has become a consequence and not a cause in its own right. If a person is accepted as permanently resident, it is impracticable to refuse admission to his wife and children or, within a reasonable interpretaton, to his closely related and genuine dependants.

What is more, it is impossible to deny him the right to marry whom he will, here or overseas, and to Introduce that spouse into this country to reside with him. Where a resident population has a strongly rooted propensity, even from generation to generation, to marry among its own kind, it follows that there can in real life be no limit upon future immigration; and the larger and therefore the more self-conscious and closely-knit is that resident population, the more certain and the more extensive will that unlimited future immigration be.

A resident Asian and African population rising from two to three to four millions in the course of the next two decades also means continuing Asian and African immigration to which no limit can be placed and which must in turn accelerate the growth of the total. The question upon which the future of this country hangs is not, as so many fondly suppose, whether immigration is to be "stopped" or not. It is whether we shall or can continue to accept a resident African and Asian population of the present or prospective size as a fait accompli, as a permanent and irreversible fact.

In posing this question, we turn from confronting the escapism of levity to confront the escapism of despair: for Instantly comes the reaction from high. and low, from every point of the compass: "What is done cannot be undone; we must accept and suffer the consequences of this fact, whatever they are going to be". What is certain is that whatever the consequences may he, they cannot be bought off by public expenditure and environmental or economic contrivances.

The idea that this is possible is an extension of the cruel and hoary fallacy that crime and violence are caused by what is nowadays fashionably called "deprivation", and that they can therefore be, reduced or prevented by raising the standards of housing, of education, of amusement and of affluence generally. The catastrophe of widespread violence, entrenched in a divided community, can be averted only in the way that other apprehended catastrophes can be averted: namely, by removing its root cause. That root cause is the existing magnitude of the Asian and African population and the certainty of the continuing future increase in that population, proportionately to the rest, which Is inherent in its present magnitude and composition.

It follows that there is no escape except by way of such a reduction of that existing population as will be sufficient at least to remove the prospect of future growth: in other words to limit to its present dimensions the "alien wedge" (I use a famous judicial phrase) in the cities and urban areas of England. Between 1965 and 1970 "assistance to all who wish to return home" was part of the official policy of the Conservative Party in Opposition. But though much emphasis was laid upon it before the general election of 1970, no attempt was made to implement it.

On the contrary, measures were taken actively to discourage even those below the supplementary benefit level from persisting in applying for repatriation. Since then it has become conventional practice thoughtlessly to repeat, as if it were self-evident, that repatriation is impracticable. Repatriation, and repatriation on the major scale which is necessary, is not impracticable. The only rational alternative to disaster can never be dismissed as impracticable.

The Asian and West Indian immigrants into this country and their children born here are in the overwhelming majority citizens of their countries of origin, acknowledging and professing themselves to be so and recognized and represented as such by the diplomatic and consular representatives of their respective nations.

The public recognition by authority that it is in the supreme interest of all that the current immigration and its consequences should be decisively reversed would produce results of which no conception can be formed as long as all conspire to treat the proposition as unreal and unmentionable.

If repatriation is public policy, then the natural claim of any family to be united can be met by assistance for those in Britain to rejoin their families in their countries of origin: the, present obligation to admit dependants is replaced by an obligation to facilitate the reunification of families in their own country.

If repatriation is public policy, the obligation to provide maintenance from public funds to those unemployed or disabled or destitute in Britain is replaced by an obligation to provide for their resettlement in their homelands.

If repatriation is public policy, there is no reason why tax relief should be given for dependants, real or fictitious, who are overseas.

At present every pressure, every inducement, every assumption is directed towards the permanence of New Commonwealth immigration. The situation would be transformed if the underlying presumption of public policy were reversed.

I'd seen a hint once before that Denis Macshame had been involved in creating the NUJ Guidelines on Race Reporting but could never find definitive proof of it. Now I have. While rummaging through the Times Archive, I came across a letter he wrote to the paper (appearing in the September 18 1978 edition) admitting his authorship, part of which I reproduce above.

For the uninitiated, these guidelines have had a baneful effect on British democracy by establishing systematic censorship in the media about all matters related to immigration. As his name suggests, Macshame is one of the most despicable of all British politicians, a man who, prior to becoming a politician, was even sacked by the BBC for gross dishonesty.

Macshame's letter was written in response to an article by Bernard Levin on the new NUJ Guidelines on Race Reporting. It's good to see that Levin had him sussed even back then. Here's an extract from what he wrote (from the Times, September 15, 1978):

I never supposed that the question would arise, but since it has I might as well say at once that I do not much care to be told how to do my job as a journalist by a journalist who was sacked for professional misconduct, has been unable to find regular employment ever since, and at present lives on an ex gratia payment of £3,500 a year which comes out of the union subscriptions paid by me and my fellow members of the NUJ. (Our contribution to his upkeep is made on an involuntary basis, none of us, as far as I know, having been asked whether we feel thus generously inclined towards him, let alone given the opportunity to contract-out in favour of Oxfam or the RSPCA.) The fact that the gentleman in question is the present President of our union makes it worse, not better, and the fact that he doesn't know what protagonist means and spells Goebbels with one b and two ls does notthing to instil in me a feeling of confidence in his qualifications as an arbiter of journalistic standards and an instructor in their application.

The pamphlet MacShane referred to in the letter extract quoted above was called Black to Front. I may be the only person in the world who has ever ordered it from an antiquarian bookshop. It contained an early version of the guidelines quoted above (much of the text is still the same) as well as pages of advice on similar themes. The pamphlet was distributed to all members of the NUJ in the 1970s.

Macshame later made the following boast about it.

The first political pamphlet I ever wrote was in 1978. It revealed and denounced the indifference of British newspapers and television to the problems facing the black and Asian communities in the UK. It asked why there were no Afro-Caribbean or Asian broadcasters, reporters, news-readers or by-lines in our papers. I cited the anti-Semitism of the Daily Mail and Daily Express in the 1930s when they told readers that too many Jews were being allowed into Britain from Germany and that our small island could not face any more aliens arriving to disturb social harmony or compete for professional jobs. I argued that in some respects the media treatment of the then BME communities in the 1960s and 1970s had some similarities.
The pamphlet provoked outrage in the press. How dare this upstart young activist from the National Union of Journalists tell editors who they should and should not employ! How dare he insist that the racism and anti-Semitism of the National Front (1970s forerunner of today’s British National Party) should be exposed as pernicious evil! How dare he suggest that the xenophobia and attacks on Asians in the Daily Mail and Daily Express should be linked to those papers’ anti-Semitism of pre-war years! Bernard Levin devoted a whole column in The Times to trashing my pamphlet, denouncing my ‘Noddy language’ as unworthy of consideration.
Today everything has changed utterly and I feel vindicated. Some of our finest TV and press reporters and news stars are from the BME community and the appointment of community relations correspondents and investigation of the racism and discrimination that non-white British citizens face is now a norm.

It undermines the credibility of the case he made about the islamisation of Europe and government complicity in it.

It makes it easier for them to keep him locked up forever. If he was convicted in a conventional way, they might have to let him out in 20-25 years, when he would be in his 50s - still young enough to do some damage.

It prevents a trial taking place. Breivik could have used the trial to showcase his theories. This would have been extremely uncomfortable for the elite since his theories are basically correct.

Comment Macht Frei has a Sunny Hundal article today discussing the 'My Tram Experience' video. To his credit, Hundal argues against applying criminal sanctions to the woman. It's interesting to note that this article went up at 12.05 pm and comments have already been closed on it as I write as 1.23 pm, barely more than an hour later. Presumably, too many of the comments were in defence of the tram woman for the Guardian's liking.

In the article, Hundal claims that the tram woman is "the product of the opinions of the rightwing press". No, Sunny. The tram woman is the product of genocide. The Genocide Convention recognises the existence of peoples as peoples, not just as collections of individuals. Peoplehood is a complex phenomenon embracing elements of language, culture and common ancestry, real or perceived. When you deliberately foster conditions intended to make it impossible for people to maintain their own distinctiveness as peoples, and you do this without the people's consent, you are committing a crime against humanity. That crime has a name: genocide.

To maintain their own distinctiveness, a people requires physical space inhabited by others belonging to the same group and practising the same culture. When that physical space is taken from them by the enforced colonisation of other peoples, it becomes progressively more difficult for a people to preserve its own integrity. If this transformation occurs with the people's clear and overwhelming consent, fine. People can voluntarily opt for change. But the European peoples were overwhelmingly opposed to the mass immigration of non-Europeans into their countries when the process started and still are today. That this change was imposed by an elite without democratic consent converts it from being a misguided policy into a crime.

The transformation has no moral legitimacy and the tram woman has every right to express her indignation about it. The peoples of Europe did not consent to handing over their countries or their cities to aliens.

But in modern Europe, the elite who are inflicting this genocide have made it a criminal offence for its victims even to talk about what is happening to them.

"We have enormous problems with a lot of young men from the Maghreb", confirms the Bern police director Hans-Jürg Käser (BDP) in the "SonntagsZeitung". He is vice-president of the committee of all justice and police directors in Switzerland.

Many make "enormously high demands"

According to Käser, the increase in criminal offences affects all cantons. It is the delinquency of young Tunisians especially that exceeds previous experiences: "What we are living through today is something we haven't experienced with previous waves of refugees"

A majority of the men from the Maghreb make enormously high demands. "They expect first-class accommodation and care, to receive a well-paid job right away and they won't be told what to do," says Käser. A strikingly large number shrink from nothing: they steal clothes, shoes or alcohol, break into cars or deal drugs.

"I know of cases in which the asylum seekers just walked past the checkout-till with a fully laden shopping trolley," says the vice-president of the committee of justice and police directors in the interview with the newspaper.

The old national identity of France or the west is collapsing. It is becoming another identity that is pluralist, multi-faceted, different, where Islam, the black, the Arab and the Chinese have their place.

All of the European countries are going through a grave identity crisis. The old national identities constructed on a religious basis, or on the basis of white ethnicity, are being called into question by the dynamics of migration and globalisation.

We are in the painful phase of a new national identity being born ... in 10 years France will be transformed. It will become much more multicultural and pluralist.

It is this pluralism, this diversity, that the media and political elite has never accepted.

French society is being changed by the minorities, and it's these minorities who are going to rehumanise it, because they bring values."

Meanwhile Patrick Lozès, a French presidential candidate from one of these value-laden minority groups, has been caught with his hands in the till. A former president of CRAN (Conseil représentatif des associations noires) [Representative Council of Black Associations] and board member of other humanitarian organisations like the World Children's Fund. he is now being investigated for money laundering.

Here's his presidential campaign poster: Don't Vote White.

Just to be clear, this is a play on words. "Voter blanc" can also mean leave your vote blank or spoil your voting papers. But "Don't Vote White" is clearly one of the intended meanings.

Earlier the British Transport Police said: 'The video posted on YouTube and Twitter has been brought to our attention and our officers have launched an investigation.

'At present it is not entirely clear which tram stops the offence took place between and when it occurred.

'As a result we need anyone who witnessed this incident, or with any information that could assist our investigation - including the identity of the woman - to contact us.

'We will not tolerate racism in any form on the rail network and will do everything in our power to locate the person responsible.'

A spokeswoman for Transport for London (TfL), said: 'All of our customers have the right to use our services without fear of being abused.

'TfL will not tolerate this disgusting and offensive behaviour and we will work with the police to fully investigate this incident.

'London Tramlink has a dedicated team of police officers who patrol the network and we would like to assure all our customers that we will continue to do everything we can to ensure that they can travel safely.

'We would appeal to whoever posted the video to contact us in confidence.'

'What has this country come to? A load of black people and a load of f***ing polish. A load of f***ing, yeah... you're all f***ing... do you know what I mean? 'You ain't English. No, you ain't English either. You ain't English. None of you's f***ing English. Get back to your own f***ing... do you know what sort out your own countries, don't come and do mine.'It's nothing now. Britain is nothing now. Britain is f** all. My Britain is f*** all.'Yeah its fine. I have got a little kid here. Have respect? I have a little boy here. F** you. I dare you, I f***ing dare you.'Don't watch my language. Go back to where you come from, go back to f***ing Nicaragua or where ever you come from. Just f***ing go back.'I work, I work, I work, this is my British country until we let you lot come over.'So what. It is my British country, you ain't British. Are you British? You ain't f***ing British. F*** off.'You ain't British, you're black. Where do you come from?'No, someone's got to talk up for these lot. Look the whole f***ing tram, look at them. Who is black and who is white.'There is all black and f***ing burnt people.'

If we want to drain the brown swamp, which the Zwickau terrorists have again brought into view, do we not then have to provide immigration today? Do we not have to communicate into the furthest corner of this country that it is the immigrants who are the only ones capable of rescuing the ageing shop that is Germany? And do we not have to revive democracy at the same time?

You have to marvel at the cognitive dissonance. The guy wants to revive democracy by flat-out ignoring the will of the people and forcing them to accept something they don't want: the colonisation of their country by aliens.

His attitude, of course, perfectly matches the motivation behind the Labour government's conspiracy to throw open the gates to immigration, as revealed by Andrew Neather.

The PIU's reports were legendarily tedious within Whitehall but their big immigration report was surrounded by an unusual air of both anticipation and secrecy.

Drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was a paranoia about it reaching the media.

Eventually published in January 2001, the innocuously labelled "RDS Occasional Paper no. 67", "Migration: an economic and social analysis" focused heavily on the labour market case.

But the earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.

I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if this wasn't its main purpose - to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.

This is in Paris - the City of Light. These are Congolese protesting against the Congolese president Kabila. At one point the procession enters an Algerian-colonised area and the Algerians start to shout: “Mamadou! Mamadou! Mamadou! Stronger than the blacks! Stronger than the blacks! Stronger than the blacks!”

Muslim biology students are boycotting lectures about evolution because they conflict with their creationist beliefs, one of Britain’s leading scientists has revealed.

Steve Jones, emeritus professor of human genetics at University College London (UCL), said increasing numbers of his undergraduates were refusing to attend his lectures on evolution and complaining that the subject should not be taught on their course.

“It is a minority of students ... but [the problem] is definitely there and it is definitely growing,” said Jones, who teaches introductory genetics to about 300 first-year students, about a fifth of whom are Muslim.

“I had one or two slightly frisky discussions years ago with kids who belonged to fundamentalist Christian churches ... now it is Islamic, overwhelmingly.”

DARREN SCULLY’S life fell apart this week. When we meet on Thursday night, he hasn’t been outside his Naas home in three days. Even behind his front door there is no respite. The constantly ringing phones jar the nerves. The e-mails and text messages flooding his inbox carry their own verbal grenades. The radio phone-ins run amok with the guaranteed firestorm of racial bait. The newspapers littering the kitchen table tell his story in headlines. “ ‘Racist’ Mayor,” reads one on a front page.

Scully shudders and says imploringly, “I am not that person . . . Please believe that. I am not a racist.” His problem is the words from his own mouth in not one but two radio interviews – on 4FM and KFM – within 10 hours of each other on Monday and Tuesday. He stated that he was no longer willing to take representations from “black Africans” living in his constituency because of his experiences of “bad manners”, “aggressive” behaviour and a willingness to “play the race card”.

Two days on, the 38-year-old quantity surveyor and Fine Gael town and county councillor has the appearance of a thoroughly chastened man. He has resigned as mayor of Naas, on the basis that, as first citizen, his position was “untenable”, although he is determined to remain on both councils.

“I’ve taken the decision that only those people who voted for me can decide whether I am worthy to serve as a councillor at the next election,” he says.

Meanwhile, his apologies, “total” and “unreserved”, are repeated unceasingly and his statements are “totally retracted”.

“I have made a huge mistake,” he says. “I want to apologise profusely and say it was wrong. I am a human being. Human beings sometimes do things and say things that are wrong, and I hope that all of the people who live in this country can look into their hearts and find it in them to forgive me and give me a second chance.”

He describes himself as “on the edge”, and there is no doubt that he is. Pausing for long moments, choking on words, eyes brimming, he says, “This, for me, has been the worst week of my life, the worst week of my family’s life. At stages I have been retching because . . . because I have put my family’s safety in jeopardy, I have put my career in jeopardy, I have put my livelihood in jeopardy. I have said things that have greatly offended people, which is something that I will never do again . . . because it is not me.”

He continues, haltingly, tears trickling down his face. “I have been accused of being a racist, a fascist and a Nazi – and I am none of those things. I am an honest, hardworking, decent man who has so much love to give to so many people, and it has been a desperate time for me personally . . . And it’s only the strength of my friends and my family that has kept me going, and messages from people all over the country who mightn’t share my views but who said that I have courage and that tomorrow could be a better day.”

A couple of messages, he says, have gone beyond verbal criticism. “They have said some very, very nasty things. One message said, ‘Watch yourself on the street.’ ”

He is under threat in other ways. His livelihood is on the line.

Formal complaints about his remarks have been made to the Garda, which is investigating “whether an offence” has taken place. His future in Fine Gael is up for discussion at the December 14th meeting of the party’s national executive. He accepts that this could mean expulsion. And while his family and friends remain loyal, they too are bewildered and asking hard questions.

While there might be a temptation to take comfort from the fact that about 80 per cent of more than 1,200 messages sent to him have been supportive, he resists it. The obviously sincere, wounded words of some of the critical messages have affected him.

As a public representative I have taken a decision some years back to no longer deal with representations from immigrants coming from african countries, the majority of them I found to be very demanding and very quick to play the race card if you dis agreed with their point of view, and one Nigerian lady threatened me to go to the papers accusing me of been a racisit if I did not secure her a Council house.

…it pains me to see people born and rared in my town unable to get a council house who are well entitled to it but no houses are currently available and there are many africans now housed because the system states that larger families get jumped up the list.

I have found many africans are well versed on their entitlements are currently on most days in the Council building you see a steady stream of them coming in looking for housing or grants or whatever is going. a few years back when we opened a new council estate in sallins and were handing out the keys, a lady from sierra leone started to complain to me that the house was not big enough for her and her family and could we knock some walls internally to create more room, a council colleauge quickly asked her how big was her house in sierra leone, she lived in a hut…. the mind boggles.

The law badly needs to be changed and it is something I have been raising with the present government and will continue to do so, but as usual in this country the PC brigade will be out in force been vocal and accusing me of been a racist and anyone else who dares raise the subject, the reason why I only am addressing africans here is because under EU law if you are from an EU country you are entitled to benefits as we are in other EU countries, but Irish citizens will get feck all in African countries.

Last week the EU held a conference aimed at pushing their new agenda of extending public service access rights to illegal immigrants. Titled "Dignity and rights of irregular migrants", you can find more details of it here if you can stomach it. Note the new politically correct term for illegal immigrants: irregular migrants.

Access to necessary healthcare should be made available to irregular migrants on the same basis as nationals, including rules relating to payment of and exemption from fees.

Pregnant women should have cost-free access to ante and post natal care and care during delivery, and children should have the same access to healthcare as nationals.

Irregular migrant children should be entitled to enrol for free primary education.

Healthcare and education providers and the courts should not be placed under a duty to report irregular migrants to immigration authorities. Where such practices exist, they should be discontinued.

Law enforcement authorities should not conduct operations that directly discourage migrants' access to fundamental rights such as patrolling at education and healthcare facilities.

Building on the Employers Sanctions Directive, effective mechanisms should be put in place to allow access to justice in practice for irregular migrants.

The role of non-governmental organisations and trade unions which help irregular migrants to overcome practical barriers to access healthcare, education and access to justice, should be recognised and supported by national authorities.

It looks as though the next two big items on the xenomaniac agenda are:

The picture shows little baby Jihad and his proud Berlin mother. At 6 kilos he is one of the heaviest babies ever born in Germany, and the heaviest known to have been born without an operation. Yes, Jihad really is the baby's name. His father Mohammed from Lebanon insists that the name does not signify Holy War but the idea that he will do his duty to Allah. Jihad is the 14th child born into the family.

Our governments are no longer protecting us. They have sided with the invaders. Some French citizens are now considering forming a private militia to deal with the violence.

"It’s going to end very badly", says the resident of tower block 2 in la Gayonne, his eyes red from lack of sleep.

"If the police and local officials don’t take the measure of our despair it’s going to come to blows. Or worse. I’ve spent the night with a weapon in my car to defend it. The idea of a private militia is starting to go around the tower blocks and we won’t be responsible for the damage. We’re no longer safe in our apartments. Our vehicles are threatened and we’re being forced back.”

Too much damage

In a few words, this local resident, who insists on her anonymity from fear of reprisals, describes well the ambience that reigns in la Gayonne. In the last few days about a dozen vehicles have been destroyed or damaged. The apartments have been the target of stone-throwing and the tower block 2 entrance hall has paid the price of the stupidity of four “jeunes” [young people] who first attacked the vehicles then the doors of the entrance hall.

The insurance companies no longer insure

"Our insurance companies don’t want to insure us any more", complains this mother of a family whose car has been damaged five times since August. She insists that her household insurance will be terminated by the company next January 1 unless she accepts a substantial increase in her premiums.

"I just don’t have the means to pay more. We are in difficulties and these “jeunes” are going to end up sinking us. My daughter also refuses to sleep in her bedroom ever since a fire threatened our windows.”

30 years ago "We were privileged!"

"When we moved into these apartments years ago we were the privileged ones,” says Bernard who will soon have spent 29 years in the tower block. “Today nothing works. We’re worried. We live in fear of attacks and thefts. It’s not normal. We’re paying for a certain number of services which they are not able to provide us with.”

Last week while putting his car in a garage, a resident had stones thrown at her by “jeunes” from a footpath. Another had her handbag stolen in front of her kid while she was unloading her shopping.

"I am a “pied-noir” [former European colonist in Algeria] and these tower blocks are all I’ve ever known since I arrived in Béziers. Lately, I haven’t gone out wearing jewels any more for fear of being attacked."

Head of Section Hanna Norum Eliassen tells Dagsavisen, “Ethnic Norwegian pupils quit and applied to other schools last year and the year before. Some expressed loneliness at being “white” Norwegians, resulting in classes consisting of even more pupils from a minority background. Consequently, we lost some of the diversity we, students, and ethnic minority parents wanted.”

“It was a difficult, but responsible decision to keep the ethnic Norwegian students more united,” she continues, defending the choice by saying, “after much discussion and consideration, we ultimately took the difficult decision to place 14 ethnic Norwegians in the first two classes, but none in the third. It has led to fewer Norwegian students dropping out.”

It seems that there is some hope after all, and that no matter how much indoctrination a human being might suffer they will know, instinctively, that there's something not quite right going on.

I wonder who really wanted diversity; time and again we hear comfortable upper middle-class parents baying about diversity while paying for their children to attend private schools hundreds of miles away. There exist in central London ghettos of very rich and very poor.

“This is pure apartheid. It’s segregation, not integration in the Norwegian public school system,” says a shocked Professor of Law, Henning Jakhelln, who specialises in human rights, education, and school legislation.

Leftist islamic enablers will often tout out the "apartheid" card, most often against Israel but it seems the use is spreading now to encompass separating pupils. You'd think a professor of law would appreciate that apartheid was a disgusting, racist practice which resulted in a split society. In this case, it is pure, sharia compliant islam that would result in a fractured society. Ironically, the West's obsession with integration and placating muslims' desire for more sharia will inevitably result in a real apartheid state but shh, let's not spoil the surprise.

Several ethnic minority pupils and parents interviewed by Dagsavisen say they are appalled at the school’s decision.

At a recent parent-teacher meeting, the one of the pupils’ fathers asked, “Why my son was in a class composed purely of ethnic minorities. The answer I got was quite shocking. “

With all due respect, sir, hundreds of thousands of ethnic Europeans are asking the same exact questions and the answer (mutual enrichment through mutli-culturalism) was probably just as shocking for them.

This week’s State Visit to the UK by Turkey’s President, Abdullah Gul, reminds us that Turkey is a country that is developing a new role and new links for itself, within and beyond existing structures and alliances. The UK and Turkey have a strong relationship across the range of foreign policy and security issues. Over the last 18 months we have laid firm foundations for that relationship through an ambitious Strategic Partnership which prompted the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to say that relations with the UK had entered a “golden age.” Indeed they have.

French police arrest a Muslim girl for stealing something from a window stall. Her mother then turns up at the police station wearing a burka. The police tell her it is a an offence to wear the burka and ask her to remove it.

Without letting us continue, she tells us that our country is screwed and soon the Muslims will have the power; that the French women are all whores dressed as they are; and that no one, not even the judge, will prevent her from dressing like that. At this moment the woman starts speaking to us in Arabic, and is no longer willing to speak in French.

She refuses to sign her daughter's offence certificate.

This person then becomes hysterical and vociferous through all of the police station while telling us that we, the French, don't have much time left and that the power will soon belong to the Muslims.

She then leaves the police station after continuing to shout at the reception, while swearing that Koranic law will prevail.

Here is a great article about the history of hate speech laws. It shows they have always had their most vigorous support in undemocratic states, first in the old Communist bloc then the OIC and now, tragically but appropriately, the EU.

The strange thing is that despite the Western European fight against Article 20 of the ICCPR in the mid-1960s, hate-speech legislation enjoyed a significant increase in Western Europe during the 1970s, following the recommendations of the ICCPR. After 1989 and the disappearance of Soviet power, you might have expected that European support to this old piece of totalitarian Soviet heritage would have vanished. But now a new faction of countries in international organizations was ready to take over the role of the Communist bloc: the OIC, the Organization of the Islamic Conference. In the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the OIC in 1990, UN human rights were explicitly placed under the sharia as a source of legislation, and regarding free speech in particular, its Article 21 stated that "everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah." The OIC initially claimed free speech must never give free rein to blasphemy, and from around the millennium, the organization intoned a coordinated policy in UN organizations like the Human Rights Commission/Council and, after 2005, the General Assembly in an attempt to introduce criminalization of so-called "defamation of Islam" or, more generally, "defamation of religions" as additional human rights. During the first decade of the 2000s, such declarations were passed every year by a majority of OIC and third-world countries—and with increasingly severe demands to make criminalization of such defamation an obligation of UN member countries, to make UN special rapporteurs scrutinize the legislations of each member state to establish whether all member states did in fact obey the resolutions. Even if keeping the majority, such resolutions have steadily lost votes over the recent eight years—and this year, the OIC seems to be changing strategy in order to support and extend existing anti-hate speech legislation based on the ICCPR Article 20 in the West. Thus, the most recent resolution in the HRC refers to the wording of this article, adding even more vague crimes such as "derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or belief," just like it "deplores any advocacy of discrimination . . . on the basis of religion or belief." This results in the farcical consequence that many OIC states may now file complaints against European democracies during the Universal Periodic Review of the member states in the HRC. Thus on May 2, 2011, Egypt, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan complained that Danish hate-speech laws were not enforced to a sufficient degree—countries with no impressive human rights record.

Please read the article in full. There's one point where I disagree with the author, though.

Unlike the situation in the 1960s, the totalitarian fight against free speech in international legislation is now supported by a new pressure stemming from violent radicals and terrorists in the street. Recurrent religious pressure and terror attacks against publishers, newspapers, writers, journalists, translators, draughtsmen, and others now form a militant support to the legal struggle within international organizations. And right-wing terrorists like Anders Breivik in Norway or the Zwickau group in Germany also demand curtailment of free speech.

Did Breivik really demand curtailment of free speech? I can't say I've read every word of his manifesto but, in the parts I have read, I don't recall coming across any demands for the curtailment of free speech; rather, the opposite.

And I fear the author has completely misinterpreted the statement made by the Zwickau group (of Kebab Murders fame). He elaborates on this in another part of the article:

The German so-called "Döner killings" of Turkish immigrants were finally resolved and a neo-Nazi group in Zwickau claimed responsibility. In their posthumous manifesto, the two central members claimed they fought, among other things, for the radical change of freedom of opinion.

By "posthumous manifesto" I assume he means the 15-minute video they made. I'm not aware of any other manifesto. In this video they made the following statement:

"The National Socialist Underground is a network of comrades with the principle 'Deeds instead of words'. Until fundamental changes in politics, press police and freedom of opinion have taken place, the activities will be continued."

The author of the article mentioned above is assuming that they are here arguing against freedom of opinion. Although the statement is ambiguous, it seems to me the much more natural interpretation is that they are demanding the right TO freedom of opinion, not calling for it to be repressed.

In their view, and in Breivik's, the countries of Europe have been suffused with a kind of Left Totalitarianism which regards only one kind of thinking as acceptable. Alternative viewpoints are repressed from the public sphere. The criminalisation of opinion through hate speech legislation denies them the right to participate in democratic politics, leaving them to vent their opinions through violence instead. And it is the repression of free speech that makes them feel justified in doing this.

Europe is being rapidly islamised. Its people are increasingly conscious of what is happening, despite the best efforts of the media to disinform them, and increasingly angry about it. This anger will continue to grow in line with the Muslim population. And it will seek political expression. If it cannot find it because of hate speech laws that prevent these concerns effectively being articulated, or states abusing their power to shut down dissident political parties, then it will be vented through violence.

Massive, disruptive change is coming to Europe. Our governments don't get to decide that. All they get to decide is whether the change comes about by talking or by fighting.

A survey of Muslim women throughout the Netherlands shows that most wearers of Islamic headscarves do so of their own free will.

Six out of ten Dutch Muslim women aged 15 to 35 wear the headscarf. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of them started wearing the scarf around the age of 19 and not when they were young girls. Only 16 percent of those surveyed started wearing the scarf when aged just 13 or 14.

The research marks the publication of a book on headscarves in the Netherlands and is designed to illustrate that many contemporary Dutch prejudices against the Islamic headscarf are unfounded.

One of the strongest preconceptions is the idea that the headscarf is the result of oppression. The facts and evidence of Muslim women themselves appear to contradict this assumption.

The survey indicates that, in more than half (53 percent) of the families where the mother wears the headscarf, not all the daughters (and sometimes only one) follow her lead and also wear the scarf.

The writer of this article makes an erroneous assumption that oppression must always be physical but there are other pressures that can make a person do something they wouldn't ordinarily do. One such pressure is culture; in islamic cultures a woman who exposes her hair is considered a slut. A muslima must always cover her awrah, which can be translated as "nakedness" but is defined as her entire body, except the face and hands. How can this article say that a woman chooses to cover herself in a shapeless bin-bag of cloth if the alternative is being gossiped about and potentially facing hell-fire in the hereafter?

One of the greatest challenges for art and culture, sounded by intellectuals and also by funding bodies, is to represent diversity. But what precisely does this term mean and why does it so often placate rather than produce what it names? Prof. Steven Vertovec, Director of the Max-Planck-Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity (Göttingen, Germany) puts forward the notion of “super-diversity,” noting “the need to re-evaluate conceptions and policy measures surrounding diversity by way of moving beyond an ethno-focal understanding and adopting a multidimensional approach.”

Developing this idea further, while aiming to question and complicate the focus on immigration in the current debate, the prolific and provocative scholar and activist Tariq Ramadan weighs in on the subject. In the resulting essay, translated into Dutch and Arabic, Prof. Ramadan sets out an argument that foregrounds universalism as a necessary, if de-valued, horizon and offers a critique of the uses and limits of dialogue and discourse within the day to day practice of super-diversity.

A phenomenon which is growing in scope and against which it is time to act, believes the deputy who will question the Minister of Justice on this subject on Wednesday.

Denis Ducarme is demanding an inquiry into Islamic proselytism in our prisons.

“Religious liberty is no longer assured in our prisons. We are seeing tranquillity being purchased in return for the practice of Salafist Islam in our prisons. Many prisoners feel obliged to practice so that the others don’t harass them. The consequence of this is that a certain number of persons are leaving prison with a tendency towards fundamentalism that they didn’t have before and messages which don’t come from the Islam of openness but rather Salafist ideas,” declares Denis Ducarme who bases his remarks, in particular, on the number of halal meals served in prison.

“In ten years, the number of halal meals served in prison has spectacularly increased, to such an extent that they now represent 70% of the meals served in our penal institutions. In some prisons, certain people even go so far as to demand that the Koran is brought to their cell only by people of the Muslim faith. In some institutions, special praying areas are being arranged to the detriment of the rest. The problem is that each management has to handle it in its own way with the result that we have heads in the sand in some places”, observes the liberal deputy.

For Denis Ducarme, it is time “to stop looking the other way”. “We need adequate measures concerning the practice of religion that are the same in all prisons. It may also be necessary to put all the most influential people together in a single wing so they have no impact on the other prisoners.”

As I mentioned in a previous post, the Kebab Murders have stirred up political debate in Germany. Here is a translated extract from an interview Hans-Ulrich Jörges [on the right in the photograph] - one of the editors of the Stern news magazine - gave on the German news channel NTV.

How many murdered fellow citizens does it take, murdered by Neo-Nazis, till the mass of the people go on to the streets?

Jörges: …We note with some shock that there is no sympathy for the victims. At least not in the majority German society. In a minority milieu there is. Now and then we see a small group of people in a place where there were victims, stand in front of the door in the evening and light candles or hold up signs. Those groups are no larger than 100 people. The majority German society, we learn from this, apparently lives in a mixture of indifference, fear and even contempt towards the Turkish immigrant society that lives alongside it. They have very little to do with one another. They do not feel, do not consider them as fellow citizens. And if you look at where that comes from, I believe you need to look back at the last year. Last year Thilo Sarrazin rose up to be a folk hero. This man has transported the language of the NPD [German “far right” party they are now talking about banning in the wake of these murders, even though it had nothing to do with them] into the mainstream of society. He started the debate at the end of 2009 with phrases like “The Turks conquered Germany with their higher birth-rate”, they had “no productive function other than selling fruit and vegetables”, they “unceasingly produced little headscarf girls”. When you look back on it now, those are unbelievable phrases. And I say very deliberately that is the language of the NPD. And that book he wrote with over 1.3 million copies sold is the most successful political book since the war – incredible actually.

And what does that say about the mainstream of the society he was able to transport these theses to?

Jörges: The mainstream of society is receptive to such theses…

Why?

Jörges: Mainstream society rejects Turkish-Muslim culture. It is afraid of it. It doesn’t like it. Also it rejects integration. We’re always looking at the Turkish immigrants and their willingness to integrate. The German majority society also has no willingness to integrate, the majority society. And when we look at the mainstream again, on the internet there’s now a relatively well-known platform for inciting hatred against Turks and Muslims. It’s now had over 50 million visitors and more than 125 million page views. That is not a fringe milieu any more. That is the mainstream of society. So we shouldn’t just be looking at the right, although that’s correct; we need to look at the mainstream society too and see what’s happening there.

Eight years ago Ann Cryer, then Labour MP for Keighley, caused outrage when she spoke publicly about groups of Asian men grooming and sexually exploiting girls in her West Yorkshire town.

She said that parents had come to her in despair at the refusal of the authorities even to acknowledge, let alone tackle, a series of grotesque crimes that were breaking families apart. It was a sensitive subject, immediately leapt upon by supporters of the far Right as a way to sow hatred between white and non-white communities.

In nearby Leeds, I sat back and hoped it wasn’t true. Since then, several criminal trials have been held across northern England in which a group of men were accused of grooming and using girls for sex.

Each was a one-off prosecution but there was a pattern. The girls were always aged between 11 and 16, the first contact was in a public place such as a shopping centre, a bus station, on a street corner, outside school gates.

Cars, alcohol and drugs were almost a given. And the men? Reading the names, there was something of a pattern there as well. A growing sense of unease led last year to a Times investigation, triggered by the pending trials of sex gangs in Rotherham and Derby.

We found 17 court cases from 13 towns and cities in which two or more men were convicted of child-sex offences linked with street grooming of young teenagers. Most of the 56 convicted men were British Pakistanis.

It was easy to understand the reluctance of those involved in safeguarding children to speak openly about an ethnicity-related crime model that seemed to have planted deep roots in northern soil.

Speaking to parents, however, it became clear that huge damage was caused to hundreds of children and their families over at least two decades by those who failed to spot the elephant in the room.

Asked about group offenders involved in sexual exploitation, police forces invariably say that ethnicity is irrelevant, that “we treat every offence on its own merits”. Yet with any other type of crime, if a pattern like this were punching them in the face they would be urgently seeking to understand why. Without that knowledge, how can you put in place effective prevention measures?

Here are two truths about child sexual exploitation (CSE) and ethnicity:• most convicted child sex abusers in this country are white British men, acting alone. Of course, most white British men are not convicted child abusers;• though white British, Kurdish, Afghan, Bangladeshi and African Caribbean groups have all been linked with group CSE crimes, most identified networks in the North have involved British Pakistanis. Of course, most British Pakistanis are not in a CSE network.

A six-month national assessment of street grooming, ordered by the Government in response to the Times investigation, was published this summer and drew no conclusions about ethnicity because, it said, the data was “too inconsistent”.

Yet hidden within that data was the fact that in a country that is 88 per cent white and 6 per cent Asian, the 753 offenders whose ethnicity was known were 49 per cent white and 46 per cent Asian.

There were also 78 known single-ethnicity CSE networks. More than half were Asian.A disturbing mindset has developed among a criminal sub-section of young men from the British Pakistani community. It has normalised the dehumanising use and abuse of young teenage girls.

In Keighley, Muslims have taken matters into their own hands by holding workshops that aim to tackle “the absolute crisis in our community” caused by crimes that “disgrace Islam”.

They shame those of us who, not wanting to offend, not wanting to marginalise and not wanting to give ammunition to racists, have allowed such abuse to become almost endemic in parts of our country.

Grooming of young girls for sex is neither new nor uncommon. The abusers can be men or women of any nationality or social class, but mine happened to be Pakistani men.

There is a huge problem in this country with some Pakistani men preying on young white girls. It has nothing to do with Islam and most British Pakistanis have nothing but contempt for the men involved. They don’t represent any race or religion, just pure evil.

It was 1994 and I was 16 when I was caught by this evil. It’s taken me 17 years to write this down.

Back then I lived in a children’s home in Leeds and I was aware of the men in flash cars who would hang around outside. Some of the girls I lived with, aged 14 to 16, would sneak out in the early hours and return with pockets full of cigarettes to tell of their adventures.

Beyond parody, Saturday's Guardian gave us this. A couple of choice quotes here may prevent an incredulous spill of coffee:

Britain's biggest unions are warning of a threat of violence by far-right groups during national strike action this month, amid concern that fascist elements are increasingly intent on targeting striking public sector workers.Unite, Unison and the TUC said they were taking the prospect of disruption by far-right supporters seriously, and had begun to liaise with police to assess any risk to pickets or those on protest marches. The development follows signs that splinter groups from the English Defence League are broadening their campaign from targeting Muslims to trade unionists and socialist organisations. Members of the EDL have recently been involved in attacks on anti-racist and anti-cuts protesters, as well as attempting to target the Occupy movement which has camped outside St Paul's Cathedral.

To back up the unsubstantiated fear mongering, an expert is wheeled out:

Dr Matthew Goodwin, extremism expert and political lecturer at the University of Nottingham, said the far right in the UK was becoming increasingly confrontational. "Historically, trade unionists and the far right have been fiercely opposed to one another," he said. "Trade unionists view the modern far right as a continuation of interwar fascism, and so support anti-fascist campaigns and groups. Meanwhile, far-right extremists tend to view trade unionists as promoting multiculturalism and political correctness. While these disputes are ideological, they have often become incredibly personal.

"Over the past three years, the far right in Britain has become increasingly confrontational and provocative."

Forgetting for a moment that trade's unions and the labour party where formed to protect the interests of British working people, Unites Chief Pinhead, Len McCluskey sez:

"Trade unionists stand against everything the EDL stands for," he said. "Trade unionists have fought long and hard for a fairer society, one with respect at its core. Ultra-rightwing groups care about nothing other than stoking hatred, which is why they have no place in our communities."

With youth unemployment in the UK at over 1 million and long term, systemic unemployment at several millions, what is "fair" about continued mass immigration? What is "fair" about the liberalised free movement of labour within Europe? Nothing - but union leaders have little to say about real problems, only imaginary ones.

That's because, like the boss class, like the politicos, like academia and the bureaucracy, local, national and supra-national, the unions have signed up for GLOBALISATION and only represent and agitate for MORE GLOBALISATION.

Greetings fellow counter-jihadists, I'm taking over the maintenance of this blog from Cheradenine Zakalwe until such time as they deem fit.

I've taken on this task because, although hard Leftists and socialists would want you to believe otherwise, there is a very real and present danger facing Europe and the peace and prosperity we've enjoyed. Although the Euro and EU are also potential enemies of democracy, the more pressing threat is unchecked immigration from cultures which do not share our values and mores.

I'm sure the readers of this blog already know this but just in case there are ditherers who are unsure about it all and who happen upon this site, it may be important to reiterate it occasionally for the benefit of those too lazy to go through the site.

I look forward to spreading news of our perfidious governments and their apparent desire to replace the indigenous people's of Europe with aliens.

I'll be moving abroad soon and I need to focus on making preparations for it, so I'm going to stop the blog here. I may resume blogging next year, depending on how I feel once I'm settled in my new home. Living in another country may change my perspective on things. We'll see. Regardless, I will remain involved in resisting the islamisation of Europe. It's the only thing that really matters in our lifetimes.

Thanks to all who have left comments on the blog, linked to it or translated some of my articles into other languages. Continue your dissent.

Carl Jung, one of the founding fathers of psychology, wrote this about Hitler in the late 1930s.

We don't know whether Hitler is founding a "new Islam". He has already gone some way towards it; he resembles Mohammed. The German emotional world (Gefühlswelt) is Islamic. They are all acting as if intoxicated by a raging god. That may be our future history.

This hefty holy book requires not only strong devotion, but also strong arms to read, as it weighs a mammoth 800 kilograms and boasts 632 pages sized two by one and a half meters. The gold- and silver-encrusted cover studded with malachite and semi-precious stones holds a giant turquoise 14 centimeters in diameter. The price of this opulent opus is unknown, but it took over a year to make.

The carefully crafted Koran was ordered from Italy for the Foundation on Restoring Cultural and Historical Heritage in Russia’s republic of Tatarstan. And it’s certainly got a spirited reception. “This edition of the Koran has become a precious gift to all Russian Muslims,” says the Islamic spiritual leader of Tatarstan, Ildus Faizov.

The unique edition now resides in a mosque within the Kremlin of the city of Kazan. Next summer, the weighty holy tome will be moved to Bolgary – a Tatarstan region which embraced Islam as its official religion in 922.